A panel-based mutational signature of homologous recombination deficiency associates with response to PARP inhibition in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The PARP inhibitor (PARPi) olaparib is approved for homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene-altered metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, there is significant heterogeneity in response to PARPi in patients with mCRPC. Better clinical biomarkers are needed to identify patients likely to benefit from PARPi. METHODS: Patients with prostate adenocarcinoma and panel sequencing at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute were identified. Mutational signature analysis was performed using SigMA to characterize tumors as HRR deficient (HRD). The validity of SigMA to identify patients likely to benefit from olaparib was compared to the current FDA label (presence of a deleterious alteration in one of 14 HRR genes). RESULTS: 546 patients were identified, of which 34% were HRD. Among patients with HRR gene alterations, only patients with BRCA2 two-copy loss (2CL) were more likely to be HRD compared to patients without HRR gene alterations (74% vs 31%; P = 9.1 × 10-7). 28 patients with mCRPC received olaparib, of which 13 were HRD and 9 had BRCA2 2CL. SigMA improved upon the current FDA label for predicting PSA50 (sensitivity: 100% vs 90%; specificity: 83% vs 44%; PPV: 77% vs 47%; NPV: 100% vs 89%) and rPFS > 6 months (sensitivity: both 92%; specificity: 93% vs 53%; PPV: 92% vs 63%; NPV: 93% vs 89%). On multivariate analysis, incorporating prognostic clinical factors and HR gene alterations, SigMA-predicted HRD independently associated with improved PSA-PFS (HR = 0.086, p = 0.00082) and rPFS (HR = 0.078, p = 0.0070). CONCLUSIONS: SigMA-predicted HRD may better identify patients likely to benefit from olaparib as compared to the current FDA label. Larger studies are needed for further validation.

Tivozanib plus nivolumab versus tivozanib monotherapy in patients with renal cell carcinoma following an immune checkpoint inhibitor: results of the phase 3 TiNivo-2 Study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors are cornerstones of first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma; however, optimal treatment sequencing after progression is unknown. This study aimed to assess clinical outcomes of tivozanib-nivolumab versus tivozanib monotherapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who have progressed following one or two lines of therapy in the post-ICI setting. METHODS: TiNivo-2 is a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial at 190 sites across 16 countries, in Australia, Europe, North America, and South America. Patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and progression during or after one to two previous lines of therapy (including one ICI) were randomised 1:1 to tivozanib (0·89 mg per day, orally) plus nivolumab (480 mg every 4 weeks, intravenously) or tivozanib (1·34 mg per day, orally). Randomisation was stratified by immediate previous therapy (ICI or non-ICI) and International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk category. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), defined as the time from randomisation to first documentation of objective progressive disease according to RECIST 1·1 or death from any cause, whichever came first, by independent radiology review. Efficacy was evaluated in the intention-to-treat population, and safety was assessed in patients who received one or more doses of the study drug. This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04987203) and is active and not recruiting. FINDINGS: From Nov 4, 2021, to June 16, 2023, 343 patients were randomly assigned to tivozanib-nivolumab (n=171) or tivozanib monotherapy (n=172). Median follow-up was 12·0 months. Median PFS was 5·7 months (95% CI 4·0-7·4) with tivozanib-nivolumab and 7·4 months (5·6-9·2) with tivozanib monotherapy (hazard ratio 1·10, 95% CI 0·84-1·43; p=0·49). Among those with an ICI as their immediate previous therapy (n=244), median PFS was 7·4 months (95% CI 5·6-9·6) with tivozanib-nivolumab and 9·2 months (7·4-10·0) with tivozanib monotherapy. With non-ICIs as the most recent therapy, lower median PFS was observed, with no difference between groups (tivozanib-nivolumab 3·7 months [95% CI 2·7-5·4] and with tivozanib monotherapy 3·7 months [1·9-7·2]). Serious adverse events occurred in 54 (32%) of 168 patients receiving tivozanib-nivolumab and 64 (37%) of 171 patients receiving tivozanib monotherapy. One (<1%) treatment-related death occurred (tivozanib group). INTERPRETATION: These data further support that ICI rechallenge should be discouraged in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Furthermore, these data suggest that tivozanib monotherapy has efficacy in the post-ICI setting. FUNDING: Aveo Pharmaceuticals.

A genetic basis for sex differences in Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma.

Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma (tRCC) is a rare, female-predominant cancer driven by a fusion between the transcription factor binding to IGHM enhancer 3 (TFE3) gene on chromosome Xp11.2 and a partner gene on either chromosome X (chrX) or an autosome. It remains unknown what types of rearrangements underlie TFE3 fusions, whether fusions can arise from both the active (chrXa) and inactive X (chrXi) chromosomes, and whether TFE3 fusions from chrXi translocations account for the female predominance of tRCC. To address these questions, we performed haplotype-specific analyses of chrX rearrangements in tRCC whole genomes. We show that TFE3 fusions universally arise as reciprocal translocations and that oncogenic TFE3 fusions can arise from chrXi:autosomal translocations. Female-specific chrXi:autosomal translocations result in a 2:1 female-to-male ratio of TFE3 fusions involving autosomal partner genes and account for the female predominance of tRCC. Our results highlight how X chromosome genetics constrains somatic chrX alterations and underlies cancer sex differences.

First-line Systemic Therapy Following Adjuvant Immunotherapy in Renal Cell Carcinoma: An International Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Adjuvant pembrolizumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but real-world data on sequential treatment are scarce. We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes of first-line (1L) systemic therapy following adjuvant immune oncology (IO)-based regimens. METHODS: A retrospective study including patients with recurrent RCC following adjuvant IO across 29 international institutions was conducted. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) on 1L systemic therapy estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Preplanned subanalyses of clinical outcomes by type of 1L systemic therapy, recurrence timing, and International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups were performed. Treatment-related adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation, dose reduction, or corticosteroid use were assessed. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 94 patients were included. Most received adjuvant pembrolizumab (n = 37, 39%), atezolizumab (n = 28, 30%), or nivolumab + ipilimumab (n = 15, 16%). The cohort included 49 (52%) patients who had recurrence within 3 mo of the last adjuvant IO dose, whereas 45 (48%) recurred beyond 3 mo. Bone metastases were significantly higher in tumors recurring at <3 mo (10/49, 20%) than those recurring at >3 mo (1/45, 2.2%; p = 0.008). Most patients received 1L vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy (VEGF-TT; n = 37, 39%), IO + VEGF-TT (n = 26, 28%), or IO + IO (n = 12, 13%). The remaining underwent local therapy. The median follow-up for the 1L systemic therapy cohort was 15 mo. The 18-mo PFS and OS rates were 45% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 34-60) and 85% (95% CI: 75-95), respectively. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 32 (42%) patients and included skin toxicity (n = 7, 9.2%), fatigue (n = 6, 7.9%), and diarrhea/colitis (n = 4, 5.3%). Limitations included selecting patients from large academic centers and the short follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A subset of patients with recurrent RCC following adjuvant IO respond to systemic therapies, including VEGF-TT and IO-based regimens. Notably, patients with favorable-risk disease may derive more benefit from VEGF-TT than from IO therapies in this setting. Future approaches utilizing radiographic tools and biomarker-based liquid biopsies are warranted to detect occult metastatic disease and identify candidate patients for adjuvant IO therapy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Adjuvant pembrolizumab significantly improved overall survival in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). There are limited data on clinical outcomes after the recurrence of RCC tumors following adjuvant immunotherapy. In this study, we find that patients respond to subsequent systemic therapies across different treatment options.

Impact of Prior Chemotherapy on Response to Second-line Pembrolizumab in Urothelial Cancer: Exploratory Analysis of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-045 Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Until recently, the standard first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) was platinum-based combination chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance therapy for patients without progressive disease (PD). For patients with advanced UC who experience PD or recurrence, standard-of-care treatment is pembrolizumab monotherapy based on the phase 3 KEYNOTE-045 study. This post hoc analysis of the KEYNOTE-045 study evaluated the efficacy of pembrolizumab compared with chemotherapy by the best response to prior platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with advanced UC that progressed or recurred after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 wk (Q3W) for ≤2 yr or investigator's choice of chemotherapy (paclitaxel [175 mg/m2], docetaxel [75 mg/m2], or vinflunine [320 mg/m2], each Q3W). Endpoints included overall survival (OS) from the initiation of the last treatment prior to death, objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DOR) as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 from the date of the first response. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: An objective response to pembrolizumab was observed in all groups in terms of a prior response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Median OS, ORR, and median DOR were numerically greater with pembrolizumab than with chemotherapy across subgroups. Patients with PD as the best response to prior platinum-based chemotherapy had the poorest OS outcomes. Limitations include a lack of formal hypothesis testing. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: When compared with chemotherapy, prolonged OS and durable responses to second-line pembrolizumab were observed independently of the response to or type of prior platinum-based chemotherapy. These findings further support pembrolizumab as second-line treatment for advanced UC.

Belzutifan versus Everolimus for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Belzutifan, a hypoxia-inducible factor 2α inhibitor, showed clinical activity in clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma in early-phase studies. METHODS: In a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, active-controlled trial, we enrolled participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies and randomly assigned them, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive 120 mg of belzutifan or 10 mg of everolimus orally once daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. The dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival. The key secondary end point was the occurrence of an objective response (a confirmed complete or partial response). RESULTS: A total of 374 participants were assigned to belzutifan, and 372 to everolimus. At the first interim analysis (median follow-up, 18.4 months), the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in both groups; at 18 months, 24.0% of the participants in the belzutifan group and 8.3% in the everolimus group were alive and free of progression (two-sided P = 0.002, which met the prespecified significance criterion). A confirmed objective response occurred in 21.9% of the participants (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.8 to 26.5) in the belzutifan group and in 3.5% (95% CI, 1.9 to 5.9) in the everolimus group (P<0.001, which met the prespecified significance criterion). At the second interim analysis (median follow-up, 25.7 months), the median overall survival was 21.4 months in the belzutifan group and 18.1 months in the everolimus group; at 18 months, 55.2% and 50.6% of the participants, respectively, were alive (hazard ratio for death, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.07; two-sided P = 0.20, which did not meet the prespecified significance criterion). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 61.8% of the participants in the belzutifan group (grade 5 in 3.5%) and in 62.5% in the everolimus group (grade 5 in 5.3%). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 5.9% and 14.7% of the participants, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Belzutifan showed a significant benefit over everolimus with respect to progression-free survival and objective response in participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies. Belzutifan was associated with no new safety signals. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; LITESPARK-005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04195750.).

A randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial of pembrolizumab plus epacadostat versus sunitinib or pazopanib as first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-679/ECHO-302).

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy-based combinations have emerged as standard therapies for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, combined with epacadostat, an indoleamine 2,3-deoxygenase 1 selective inhibitor, demonstrated promising antitumor activity in a phase 1 study in advanced solid tumors, including mRCC. METHODS: KEYNOTE-679/ECHO-302 was a randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3 study (NCT03260894) that compared pembrolizumab plus epacadostat with sunitinib or pazopanib as first-line treatment for mRCC. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic clear cell RCC and had not received systemic therapy. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks plus epacadostat 100 mg orally twice daily versus sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily (4 weeks on treatment followed by 2 weeks off treatment) or pazopanib 800 mg orally once daily. Original dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival. Enrollment was stopped when a phase 3 study in melanoma of pembrolizumab plus epacadostat compared with pembrolizumab monotherapy did not meet its primary end point. This protocol was amended, and primary end point was changed to investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1. RESULTS: One-hundred-twenty-nine patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab plus epacadostat (n = 64) or sunitinib/pazopanib (n = 65). Median (range) follow-up, defined as time from randomization to data cutoff, was 10.3 months (2.2-14.3) and 10.3 months (2.7-13.8) in the pembrolizumab plus epacadostat and sunitinib/pazopanib arms, respectively. ORRs were similar between pembrolizumab plus epacadostat (31.3% [95% CI 20.2-44.1] and sunitinib/pazopanib (29.2% [18.6-41.8]). Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 34.4% and 42.9% of patients in the pembrolizumab plus epacadostat and sunitinib/pazopanib arms, respectively. One patient in the sunitinib/pazopanib arm died of septic shock (not treatment-related). Circulating kynurenine levels decreased in the pembrolizumab plus epacadostat arm, but not to levels observed in healthy subjects. CONCLUSIONS: ORRs were similar between pembrolizumab plus epacadostat and sunitinib/pazopanib as first-line treatment in patients with mRCC. Safety and tolerability appeared similar between treatment arms; no new safety concerns were identified. Antitumor responses observed in patients with RCC receiving pembrolizumab plus epacadostat may be driven primarily by pembrolizumab. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03260894 .

Molecular analysis of primary and metastatic sites in patients with renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUNDMetastases are the hallmark of lethal cancer, though underlying mechanisms that drive metastatic spread to specific organs remain poorly understood. Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is known to have distinct sites of metastases, with lung, bone, liver, and lymph nodes being more common than brain, gastrointestinal tract, and endocrine glands. Previous studies have shown varying clinical behavior and prognosis associated with the site of metastatic spread; however, little is known about the molecular underpinnings that contribute to the differential outcomes observed by the site of metastasis.METHODSWe analyzed primary renal tumors and tumors derived from metastatic sites to comprehensively characterize genomic and transcriptomic features of tumor cells as well as to evaluate the tumor microenvironment at both sites.RESULTSWe included a total of 657 tumor samples (340 from the primary site [kidney] and 317 from various sites of metastasis). We show distinct genomic alterations, transcriptomic signatures, and immune and stromal tumor microenvironments across metastatic sites in a large cohort of patients with RCC.CONCLUSIONWe demonstrate significant heterogeneity among primary tumors and metastatic sites and elucidate the complex interplay between tumor cells and the extrinsic tumor microenvironment that is vital for developing effective anticancer therapies.

Treatment-free survival and partitioned survival analysis of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib: 5-year update of CheckMate 214.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy can be associated with prolonged disease control even after cessation of treatment without the need for further cancer-directed therapy. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) can also persist after discontinuation of therapy. Treatment-free survival (TFS) with and without toxicity as a component of a partitioned survival model can characterize patient survival time, which is not captured by standard outcome measures. METHODS: Data from 1096 patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) versus sunitinib (SUN) in the CheckMate 214 trial were analyzed. TFS was defined as the area between two Kaplan-Meier curves for time from randomization to protocol therapy discontinuation and time from randomization to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death, estimated as the difference in 60-month restricted mean times with confidence intervals (CIs) obtained using bootstrap sampling. Time on protocol therapy and TFS were further characterized as time with and without grade 2+ and 3+TRAEs. Survival functions were estimated in subgroups including International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk groups using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: At 5 years from randomization, 48% of patients treated with NIVO+IPI and 37% of patients treated with SUN were alive. In the intent-to-treat population, 18% of the NIVO+IPI-treated and 5% of SUN-treated patients are surviving treatment-free. For favorable-risk patients, the 60-month mean TFS was 14.4 months for NIVO+IPI versus 5.5 months for SUN (difference 8.9 months (95% CI 4.9 to 12.8)). TFS for NIVO+IPI versus SUN with grade 2+TRAEs was 5.0 and 2.1 months, respectively, and with grade 3+TRAEs was 1.2 and 0.3 months, respectively. For intermediate/poor-risk patients, the 60-month mean TFS was 10.1 months for NIVO+IPI versus 4.1 months for SUN (difference 6.1 months (95% CI 4.2 to 7.9)). TFS for NIVO+IPI versus SUN with grade 2+TRAEs was 4.0 versus 2.0 months, respectively, and 0.6 versus 0.3 months with grade 3+TRAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall survival was similar, favorable-risk patients treated with NIVO+IPI spent more time surviving treatment-free with and without toxicity versus SUN after 60 months of follow-up. Intermediate/poor-risk patients treated with NIVO+IPI had longer survival and longer TFS without toxicity versus SUN. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02231749.

Safety of pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy in a pooled analysis of phase 3 clinical trials of melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The safety profile of adjuvant pembrolizumab was evaluated in a pooled analysis of 4 phase 3 clinical trials. METHODS: Patients had completely resected stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC melanoma per American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition, criteria (AJCC-7; KEYNOTE-054); stage IIB or IIC melanoma per AJCC-8 (KEYNOTE-716); stage IB, II, or IIIA non-small cell lung cancer per AJCC-7 (PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091); or postnephrectomy/metastasectomy clear cell renal cell carcinoma at increased risk of recurrence (KEYNOTE-564). Patients received adjuvant pembrolizumab 200 mg (2 mg/kg up to 200 mg for pediatric patients) or placebo every 3 weeks for approximately 1 year. Adverse events (AEs) were summarized for patients who received ≥ 1 dose of treatment. RESULTS: Data were pooled from 4125 patients treated with pembrolizumab (n = 2060) or placebo (n = 2065). Median (range) duration of treatment was 11.1 months (0.0-18.9) with pembrolizumab and 11.2 months (0.0-18.1) with placebo. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 78.6 % (1620/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 16.3 % [336/2060]) and 58.7 % (1212/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 3.5 % [72/2065]). Immune-mediated AEs (e.g. adrenal insufficiency, hypophysitis, and thyroiditis) occurred in 36.2 % (746/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 8.6 % [177/2060]) and 8.4 % (174/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 1.1 % [23/2065]). Of patients with ≥ 1 immune-mediated AE or infusion reaction, systemic corticosteroids were required for 35.2 % (268/761) and 20.2 % (39/193) of patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile that was comparable to prior reports in advanced disease.

Detecting Small Cell Transformation in Patients with Advanced EGFR Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma through Epigenomic cfDNA Profiling.

PURPOSE: Histologic transformation to small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a mechanism of treatment resistance in patients with advanced oncogene-driven lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) that currently requires histologic review for diagnosis. Herein, we sought to develop an epigenomic cell-free DNA (cfDNA)-based approach to noninvasively detect small cell transformation in patients with EGFR mutant (EGFRm) LUAD. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: To characterize the epigenomic landscape of transformed (t)SCLC relative to LUAD and de novo SCLC, we performed chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq) to profile the histone modifications H3K27ac, H3K4me3, and H3K27me3; methylated DNA immunoprecipitation sequencing (MeDIP-seq); assay for transposase-accessible chromatin sequencing; and RNA sequencing on 26 lung cancer patient-derived xenograft (PDX) tumors. We then generated and analyzed H3K27ac ChIP-seq, MeDIP-seq, and whole genome sequencing cfDNA data from 1 mL aliquots of plasma from patients with EGFRm LUAD with or without tSCLC. RESULTS: Analysis of 126 epigenomic libraries from the lung cancer PDXs revealed widespread epigenomic reprogramming between LUAD and tSCLC, with a large number of differential H3K27ac (n = 24,424), DNA methylation (n = 3,298), and chromatin accessibility (n = 16,352) sites between the two histologies. Tumor-informed analysis of each of these three epigenomic features in cfDNA resulted in accurate noninvasive discrimination between patients with EGFRm LUAD versus tSCLC [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) = 0.82-0.87]. A multianalyte cfDNA-based classifier integrating these three epigenomic features discriminated between EGFRm LUAD versus tSCLC with an AUROC of 0.94. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate the feasibility of detecting small cell transformation in patients with EGFRm LUAD through epigenomic cfDNA profiling of 1 mL of patient plasma.

Safety and efficacy outcomes of early cessation of anti-PD1 therapy in patients 80 years or older: A retrospective cohort study.

Older patients have similar immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy and rates of adverse events as younger patients, but appear to have decreased tolerability, particularly in the oldest patient cohort (>80 years), often leading to early cessation of therapy. We aimed to determine whether early discontinuation impacts efficacy of anti-PD-1 therapy in patients ≥80 years old. In this retrospective, multicenter, international cohort study, we examined 773 patients with 4 tumor types who were at least 80 years old and treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. We determined response rate, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients who discontinued therapy early (<12 months) for reasons other than progression or death. We used descriptive statistics for demographics, response, and toxicity rates. Survival statistics were described using Kaplan Meier curves. Median (range) age at anti-PD-1 initiation was 83.0 (75.8-97.0) years. The cancer types included were melanoma (n = 286), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (n = 345), urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC) (n = 108), and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (n = 34). Of these, 102 met the primary endpoint of <12 months to discontinuation for reasons other than death or progression. Median PFS and OS, respectively, for these patients were 34.4 months and 46.6 months for melanoma, 15.8 months and 23.4 months for NSCLC, and 10.4 months and 15.8 months for UCC. This study suggests geriatric patients who have demonstrated therapeutic benefit and discontinued anti-PD-1 therapy at less than 12 months of duration for reasons other than progression may have durable clinical benefit without additional therapy.

Epigenomic signatures of sarcomatoid differentiation to guide the treatment of renal cell carcinoma.

Renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid differentiation (sRCC) is associated with poor survival and a heightened response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Two major barriers to improving outcomes for sRCC are the limited understanding of its gene regulatory programs and the low diagnostic yield of tumor biopsies due to spatial heterogeneity. Herein, we characterized the epigenomic landscape of sRCC by profiling 107 epigenomic libraries from tissue and plasma samples from 50 patients with RCC and healthy volunteers. By profiling histone modifications and DNA methylation, we identified highly recurrent epigenomic reprogramming enriched in sRCC. Furthermore, CRISPRa experiments implicated the transcription factor FOSL1 in activating sRCC-associated gene regulatory programs, and FOSL1 expression was associated with the response to ICIs in RCC in two randomized clinical trials. Finally, we established a blood-based diagnostic approach using detectable sRCC epigenomic signatures in patient plasma, providing a framework for discovering epigenomic correlates of tumor histology via liquid biopsy.

Adjuvant Everolimus in Patients with Completely Resected, Very High-risk Renal Cell Carcinoma of Clear Cell Histology: Results from the Phase 3 Placebo-controlled SWOG S0931 (EVEREST) Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: EVEREST is a phase 3 trial in patients with renal cell cancer (RCC) at intermediate-high or very high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy who were randomized to receive adjuvant everolimus or placebo. Longer recurrence-free survival (RFS) was observed with everolimus (hazard ratio [HR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.00; p = 0.051), but the nominal significance level (p = 0.044) was not reached. To contextualize these results with positive phase 3 trials of adjuvant sunitinib and pembrolizumab, we conducted a secondary analysis in a similar population of EVEREST patients with very high-risk disease and clear cell histology. METHODS: Postnephrectomy patients with any clear cell component and very high-risk disease, defined as pT3a (grade 3-4), pT3b-c (any grade), T4 (any grade), or node-positive status (N+), were identified. A Cox regression model stratified by performance status was used to compare RFS and overall survival (OS) between the treatment arms. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 1499 patients, 717 had clear cell histology and very high-risk disease; 699 met the eligibility criteria, of whom 348 were randomized to everolimus arm, and 351 to the placebo arm. Patient characteristics were similar between the arms. Only 163/348 (47%) patients in the everolimus arm completed all treatment as planned, versus 225/351 (64%) in the placebo arm. Adjuvant everolimus resulted in a statistically significant improvement in RFS (HR 0.80; 95%CI 0.65-0.99, p = 0.041). Evidence of a survival benefit was not seen (HR 0.85; 95%CI 0.64-1.14, p = 0.3) CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In patients with clear cell RCC at very high-risk for recurrence, adjuvant everolimus resulted in significantly improved RFS compared to placebo but resulted in a high discontinuation rate due to adverse events. Although the treatment HR for OS was consistent with RFS findings, it did not reach statistical significance. With a focus on risk stratification tools and/or biomarkers to minimize toxicity risk in those not likely to benefit, this information can help inform the design of future adjuvant trials in high-risk RCC.

Plasma Kidney Injury Molecule-1 for Preoperative Prediction of Renal Cell Carcinoma Versus Benign Renal Masses, and Association With Clinical Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Both clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) overexpress kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1). We investigated whether plasma KIM-1 (pKIM-1) may be a useful risk stratification tool among patients with suspicious renal masses. METHODS: Prenephrectomy pKIM-1 was measured in two independent cohorts of patients with renal masses. Cohort 1, from the prospective K2 trial, included 162 patients found to have clear cell RCC (cases) and 162 patients with benign renal masses (controls). Cohort 2 included 247 patients with small (cT1a) renal masses from an academic biorepository, of whom 184 had RCC. We assessed the relationship between pKIM-1, surgical pathology, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: In Cohort 1, pKIM-1 distinguished RCC versus benign masses with area under the receiver operating curve (AUC-ROC, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.76 to 0.86]). In Cohort 2 (cT1a only), pKIM-1 distinguished RCC versus benign masses (AUC-ROC, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.80]) and the addition of pKIM-1 to an established nomogram for predicting malignancy improved the model AUC-ROC (0.65 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.74] v 0.78 [95% CI, 0.72 to 0.85]). A pKIM-1 cutpoint identified using Cohort 2 demonstrated sensitivity of 92.5% and specificity of 60% for identifying RCC in Cohort 1. In long-term follow-up of RCC cases (Cohort 1), higher prenephrectomy pKIM-1 was associated with worse metastasis-free survival (multivariable MFS hazard ratio [HR] 1.29 per unit increase in log pKIM-1, 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.53) and overall survival (multivariable OS HR 1.31 per unit increase in log pKIM-1, 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.54). In long-term follow-up of Cohort 2, no metastatic events occurred, consistent with the favorable prognosis of resected cT1a RCC. CONCLUSION: Among patients with renal masses, pKIM-1 is associated with malignant pathology, worse MFS, and risk of death. pKIM-1 may be useful for selecting patients with renal masses for intervention versus surveillance.

Characterization of FOLH1 Expression in Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Given the emergence of PSMA-targeted diagnostic agents and therapeutics, we sought to investigate patterns of FOLH1 expression in RCC and their impacts on RCC outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a pooled multi-institutional analysis of patients with RCC having undergone DNA and RNA next-generation sequencing. FOLH1-high/low expression was defined as the ≥75th/<25th percentile of RNA transcripts per million (TPM). Angiogenic, T-effector, and myeloid expression signatures were calculated using previously defined gene sets. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated from the time of tissue collection or therapy start. RESULTS: We included 1,724 patients in the analysis. FOLH1 expression was significantly higher in clear cell (71%) compared to non-clear cell RCC tumors (19.0 versus 3.3 TPM, p < 0.001) and varied by specimen site (45% primary kidney/55% metastasis, 13.6 versus 9.9 TPM, p < 0.001). FOLH1 expression was correlated with angiogenic gene expression (Spearman = 0.76, p < 0.001) and endothelial cell abundance (Spearman = 0.76, p < 0.001). While OS was similar in patients with FOLH1-high versus -low ccRCC, patients with FOLH1-high clear cell tumors experienced a longer time on cabozantinib treatment (9.7 versus 4.6 months, respectively, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.93, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We observed differential patterns of FOLH1 expression based on histology and tumor site in RCC. FOLH1 was correlated with angiogenic gene expression, increased OS, and a longer duration of cabozantinib treatment.